I've been considering how to implement things like mines and other traps in Showdown as a hazard another player places, rather than a hazard inherent to the arena.

I've looked into how Mordheim and other such games handle these things and it feels clumsy. However, I realized that in Showdown where someone could potentially see you place them, traps are best used for area denial, to herd the opponent into a better position.

Here is what I was thinking:

1. A model can bring mines/traps into battle. They receive 1 trap and one dummy trap for each trap they purchase. The model can use an action to place a marker; each marker is marked on the bottom as either being a TRAP or a DUMMY. If the model in question has a home turf advantage they can set all their traps before the match.

2. Most basic traps affect a Small Burst Template. Any enemy model who moves through the template has a 1 in 6 chance of setting the trap off. An Edge, let's call it "Light Step," changes this to a 1 in 10 chance.

3. If the trap goes off, only then do we check to see if it's the trap or the dummy. The dummy does nothing and is removed. A trap goes off for usually 2d6 damage AP 2, affecting all units in the SBT, and stays in play.

4. Units with the "Trapmaster" or "Demolitions Expert" Edge have access to more complex traps.

5. A single set of traps costs 20 points.

That's...also clumsy, but it's the best idea I have at the moment._________________Proud Savagepedia contributor.

I agree with you about Mordheim. I really love the setting and the ideas behind the game but the rules are so clunky. I guess that's what happens when you try to take a big battle game and translate the rules to a warband style.

For something like traps I would consider applying it to area terrain and the like. I would even go so far as to say that you might want to consider writing down which piece of area terrain it affects so that it is more secretive. Otherwise I could see people using low pointed grunts to charge into potential traps, although this is pretty historical for WW2 Eastern Front games and the like.

I would also be tempted use Smarts for traps. Maybe if you enter a trapped piece of terrain you can roll Smarts and if you succeed you manage to avoid the trap. If you fail it goes off. Maybe a raise means you can disarm the trap or something similar? I feel that Smarts should be used a little more often in Showdown.

How about something like this:

1) You assign the trap to a unit.

2) When the unit is deployed write down which piece of area terrain the trap affects.

3) The unit with the trap makes a Smarts check to see if trap is deployed successfully. A failure means it is a dud or otherwise doesn't get set up. A natural 1 means it goes off on the unit that was setting up the trap.

4) Unit that enters the terrain where the trap is makes a Smarts roll. On a success they notice the trap and proceed carefully. On a failure it goes off. On a raise they manage to disarm the trap or otherwise neutralize it.

5) I think you could employ variable trap effects.

6) I think Edges would be more helpful, or more visibly important, if there was a roll for setting up or deploying the trap as I describe above.

I like a lot of what you came up with! I'm just always looking for ways to make Smarts more important. I hope this desire on my part did not get in the way of what you were thinking!

I think allowing basic traps that affect a Small Burst and do minimal damage or entangle foes works well for regular Gear.

Explosives and more esoteric traps may require Edges. I already planned, for a certain setting, to have a Demolitions Expert Edge which lets the model start with a free bomb and allows them to purchase bombs at the armory. They can also disable traps.

I might be tempted to allow Mages to inscribe runes or leave wards, perhaps they have to purchase the power and buy equipment (material components) like everyone else?_________________Proud Savagepedia contributor.

I agree with you about Mordheim. I really love the setting and the ideas behind the game but the rules are so clunky. I guess that's what happens when you try to take a big battle game and translate the rules to a warband style.

For something like traps I would consider applying it to area terrain and the like. I would even go so far as to say that you might want to consider writing down which piece of area terrain it affects so that it is more secretive. Otherwise I could see people using low pointed grunts to charge into potential traps, although this is pretty historical for WW2 Eastern Front games and the like.

I would also be tempted use Smarts for traps. Maybe if you enter a trapped piece of terrain you can roll Smarts and if you succeed you manage to avoid the trap. If you fail it goes off. Maybe a raise means you can disarm the trap or something similar? I feel that Smarts should be used a little more often in Showdown.

How about something like this:

1) You assign the trap to a unit.

2) When the unit is deployed write down which piece of area terrain the trap affects.

3) The unit with the trap makes a Smarts check to see if trap is deployed successfully. A failure means it is a dud or otherwise doesn't get set up. A natural 1 means it goes off on the unit that was setting up the trap.

4) Unit that enters the terrain where the trap is makes a Smarts roll. On a success they notice the trap and proceed carefully. On a failure it goes off. On a raise they manage to disarm the trap or otherwise neutralize it.

5) I think you could employ variable trap effects.

6) I think Edges would be more helpful, or more visibly important, if there was a roll for setting up or deploying the trap as I describe above.

I like a lot of what you came up with! I'm just always looking for ways to make Smarts more important. I hope this desire on my part did not get in the way of what you were thinking!

I look forward to your thoughts and what more you come up with!

I guess I don't like the idea of affecting which piece of terrain the trap effects because 1) I don't want to argue with the person I'm playing against and 2) it seems like this could be abused. Better if the unit just plunks down their trap and done, I think, and if a trap affects a wide area (so they're not putting down a single landmine or snare, they're throwing a few booby traps around a small area).

I wouldn't want a Smarts check to deploy the trap because then the opposing force knows if the trap was deployed or not, unless you hide dice rolls from the other player, in which case we go back to abusing the game.

Using a Smarts roll to avoid the trap could be interesting, although my counterpoint to this is that with visible tokens, the other player can simply avoid them or take the chance at their leisure._________________Proud Savagepedia contributor.

I was taking a look at a couple of games with (including SWMB) and they set up the traps before the game takes place. Each trap is recorded on a piece of paper with the "coordinates" of the trap in inches (X by Y coordinates). When the player who laid the traps feels that an enemy is close enough to the trap to set it off, he declares the trap triggered and a burst template is set directly centered on the coordinates. If anyone is under the template they are subject to the trap.

It works pretty well for a triggering mechanism... it allows for a margin of error in eye-balling the measurement. And most of the time players choose definitive pieces of terrain or pathways to set traps, so it causes other players to avoid those things if they know there are traps in play. It's an interesting fear aspect in the game.